Mike Sheil: The Truth About the Laney-Walker Overlay Zoning District

Michael D Sheil

The Laney-Walker Overlay: What is to Be Done?
-by Michael Sheil

What is the deal with the Laney-Walker overlay? We hear from all sides– it's a land-grab, it's a blessing, it's an imposition, it's a protection, a necessity even. What then is it exactly?
In trying to answer that, let me start with the zoning amendment that authorizes it. That amendment was voted on and approved by the Augusta Commission this past Summer as Section 25-E of the Richmond County Comprehensive Zoning Code.  It's a text rich in possibilities, and I will post the whole of it below, but for now I will extract only a few key points.

25-E-1:
- "The purpose of overlay zoning is to provide additional protection and/or guidance for specific areas through regulation and/or incentives that are applied in addition to the base zoning requirements."
- "They could also be used to protect the character of neighborhoods, commercial districts, and corridors. They could guide development more carefully than base zoning by identifying future urban zones and mixed use areas…"

What it is important to note here in the very first paragraph of this section of the zoning code is that this new type of overlay district can not only make the underlying base zoning of the affected district more restrictive (as is the case generally with overlay zones), but it can also make the underlying zoning LESS restrictive. The Laney-Walker revitalization plan calls for mixed-use development. This is not a fact that is being hidden. It would be truer to say that it is a fact that is being shouted from the rooftops. Business and professional uses would be mingled with residential uses. There are no two ways about it, and this is what makes it all the more striking that the representative for the private developer proposing this overlay has been giving assurances both publicly and privately that the overlay would do nothing to affect the base zoning of the area. 


The Department of Planning & Zoning gave the same assurances, so did the senior staff attorney for Richmond County. This is true enough in itself–last week's proposal would not have changed the current zoning of the neighborhood–but it would be disingenuous of them to maintain that the ultimate aim of the overlay is to leave the current zoning untouched. Mixed-use means mixed-use. The proposal last week called for limiting the allowed uses in one area of the Laney-Walker neighborhood to certain enumerated types.  "No liquor stores and pawnshops," is how they were selling it. The proponents of the overlay say that this restriction is necessary to "protect the community."


What is harmful in that? The harm (if it can be called that, "red flag" may be nearer the mark) is that the area on which the overlay was to be imposed is currently zoned almost entirely single-family residential. There is no need to protect the area from "harmful" business uses–the current zoning already absolutely forbids them. Restrictions on the business uses only makes sense if the area is to be opened up for commercial development. That is, the "mixed-use" development that the city has been so busy denying and affirming at one and the same time. Lately though, this affirmation has been wrung from Planning & Zoning–

"There is an area on Railroad Ave which I believe is the old foundry and zoned B-2 [business] which they are concerned about. Also, if their efforts are successful and the area takes off, there is the possibility that properties on Wrightsboro Rd could be rezoned."
It's not much of an admission, but after all the previous denials, it's a start. Re-zonings are, of a necessity, part of the plan. There are some who would refer to (and condemn) this sort of re-zoning as "spot zoning."

The overlay issue does not involve only businesses moving into the area, but also certain changes in the residential zoning, too. The overlay would authorize what it calls "low-density multi-family" zoning in the area. This would constitute a change as the area is, I repeat, almost entirely single-family now. The "low-density" part is there to soften the blow, I think. Again and again, city leaders have said that this overlay is to protect the neighborhood form "unwelcome" development,  yet the restrictions against unwelcome development are already there, and in fact are stronger now (the current zoning) than they would be under the proposed overlay. You simply are not allowed to put businesses and multi-family housing in a single-family residential area. Attempts to re-zone in that way (or even disagreements about permitted uses in a residential area) are usually met with vociferous denunciations:

Summerville Daycare Approved

"A daycare in a residential zoning violates county and state zoning requirements. You all need to get the facts before judging. We will lose this one the first day in court……" [huh?] (Comm. Joe Bowles)

"Austin, I guess your okay with your double standard of when the law is good and when its not?
As for a parochial school getting special treatment, that because it's a school, not a 14 hour a day business. Also last I checked parochial schools free up $$$$$ for our public schools.
If we want to talk about why Summerville has high property values it's because of planning not BS friendship zoning exemptions!" (Comm. Joe Bowles)

Augusta Commissioner Joe Bowles

"Chris, you completely are missing the basis of Summervilles case. The reason we have taken a decent area and made it better is through our master plan and adhering to it since 1977. That's why we have the property values we have, and now we have another area that is considered commercial. THIS IS KNOWN AS SPOT ZONING AND DETRIMENTAL FOR ALL NEIGHBORHOODS, NOT JUST SUMMERVILLE [emphasis added]. It sets a dangerous precedent that could spread and erode what Summerville residents have built!" (Comm. Joe Bowles)

All these quotations are from one of the Augusta commissioners who voted in favor of the overlay proposal last week, by the way. It would be a good idea, apparently, just so long as no one is proposing it in his neighborhood. There are some other aspects of the proposal that make this something I'm sure he would want to see implemented in some other neighborhood than his own. For one, the bulk of the new housing being built by the private developer (that is, the private developer who was hired by the city to redevelop the Laney-Walker area for the city), as I was saying, the bulk of the new housing is low-income government-subsidized housing. The agreements the city has entered into with the developer for building all this low-income housing can be found in the online records of the Augusta Commission, so I won't dwell on that too long. I will say, though, that revitalizing an area by moving low-income housing into it (and then restricting the surrounding homeowners' rights based on that low-income housing) seems a little counter-intuitive to me, but I'm no expert.

There is good reason to be suspicious of the Laney-Walker overlay plan. Maybe the fact that the zoning code's overlay amendment was drafted specifically to fit the Laney-Walker overlay proposal (a fact admitted by Planning and Zoning), maybe that fact made the developer (and the city) a little lazy regarding fitting the proposal to the law (and that's the oversight that has sent the proposal back to the drawing board). Whatever the case, the developer and the city government have been intentionally misleading regarding the clear implications of mixed-use development, when that is where the conversation with homeowners should have started. Until the city/developer can honestly approach it that way, I'm against this plan. As for their often stated concerns about "protecting the community", the best way to do that now is to respect the current zoning.**


Related Articles:

• Deke Plays Favorites and Who Really Represents Laney-Walker
• Dee Mathis Wins Battle Over Overlay Zone
• Where Does your Commissioner Stand on Property Rights and Due Process?
• Commission Set to Vote on Overlay Zone Today

***Do you have a story idea, a tip, or would you like to write for City Stink? Then please contact us at:  CityStink@gmail.com***
Share this on Facebook by clicking the icon below

Overlay Zone: Deke Plays Favorites and Who Really Represents Laney-Walker? (videos)

Mayor Deke Copenhaver  Nov. 21, 2011

November 21, 2011

Augusta, GA

By The Outsider  

                                         

As we told you last week in City Stink: Dee Mathis Wins Battle over Overlay Zoning District, the Augusta commission decided in a 4-6 Vote to table the Overlay Zoning District until the first commission meeting of 2012.

We thought it might also be informative to give you some of the dynamics at that Nov 15th commission meeting involving the Overlay District vote and how the mayor showed blatant favoritism to one side and pushed the envelope of parliamentary procedure and protocol.

Double Standard
At the beginning of the meeting, Dee Mathis, a homeowner in The Laney-Walker neighborhood, and Al Gray, a property rights advocate, each gave  5 minute presentations before the commission urging them to deny approval of what they said was a flawed and incomplete application for the Overlay Zoning District. It would be the only time they were allowed to speak. Following the proper protocol for citizens speaking before the commission, both Mathis and Gray went through the proper process with the clerk of the commission to be on that day's meeting agenda.

The problem is that the overlay district vote was not on the regular agenda until an hour later into the commission meeting well after Ms Mathis and Mr Gray gave their presentations. When the item finally did come back up on the agenda for a discussion and a vote, Mayor Deke had a little surprise for everybody.

Out of the blue, the mayor says that he has received a letter from Pastor Aline Scott of the Laney-Walker Neighborhood Association in support of passing the  overlay application. Though Ms Scott was not on the agenda to speak, Deke calls her forward to give a presentation nonetheless. After Ms Scott's "impromptu" presentation, the Mayor gives some commentary about those in opposition being "resistant to change". (See video below: click play button for excerpt):

Later on, in the following video, Commissioner Wayne Guilfoyle (Dist 8) raises some concerns over the proposal because of conflicting information. Dir of Planning and Zoning, George Patty, then attempts to answer some of his questions. Then, once again, the Mayor gives "surprise guest" Pastor Aline Scott a second opportunity to speak. Pastor Scott makes an incorrect statement that the current zoning laws in Laney-Walker don't restrict "anything". That is not true. Most of Laney-Walker is currently zoned single family residential, so in those areas it is prohibited for someone to put in commercial or industrial uses. But notice how the mayor continually vocalizes his agreement with Pastor Scott. After she concludes speaking for the second time, Commissioner Alvin Mason rebuts the mayor's earlier remarks about opponents just being "resistant to change". (See video below: click play button for excerpt)


No Rebuttals for the Opponents
It is important to note that the Mayor never allowed Ms Mathis nor Mr Gray a second opportunity to speak before the commission to rebut the points made by Pastor Scott and George Patty, a privilege afforded Pastor Scott, who was not even on the meeting's agenda to speak. Also, the Mayor never asked if there were other residents in the commission chambers who were in opposition to the overlay vote. In a preceding non-related zoning matter, the mayor asked for a show of hands of who was there in opposition and support. But the Mayor conducted no such informal poll when it came to the vote for the overlay district for Laney-Walker. Considering that Ms Mathis and Mr Gray made their presentations more than an hour earlier at the beginning of the meeting, the arguments they raised seemed like a distant memory; whereas George Patty and Pastor Scott were able to make their arguments right before the vote was taken. But in the end a majority of  commissioners did have  long  memories and sided with Ms Mathis' and Mr Gray's arguments.

Who Really Speaks for the Laney-Walker Neighborhood?
The mayor brought Pastor Scott forward as the representative of the Laney-Walker Neighborhood Association. It is important to note that a neighborhood association is not the same as a home-owners association. The Mayor also failed to mention that there is more than one Laney-Walker Neighborhood Association.  The association Pastor Scott represents meets at Dyess Park. A different association meets Antioch Baptist church. Was this other Laney-Walker neighborhood association solicited for their opinion on The Overlay Zoning application? Also, emails forwarded to CityStink.net show that Commissioner Matt Aitken was aware that there is more than one Laney-Walker neighborhodd association prior to the Nov. 15th commission meeting. In Dee Mathis' presentation, she begins to talk about this email from Matt Aitken and that is when the Mayor hushes her up saying that her time to speak was over.

Was Pastor Scott giving the official decision of the neighborhood association she is affiliated with or just her own personal opinion? There is no mention of any other members of this neighborhood association signing the letter of support for the overlay that pastor Scott had sent to commissioners. Also no one else from this neighborhood association spoke before the commission, only Pastor Scott. Was there an official vote by the board of directors of this neighborhood association to support the overlay vote? If so, when did this occur and do meeting minutes exist documenting such?

"Won't You Be My Neighbor?"
After Pastor Scott makes her first presentation before the commission Mayor Deke then prompts her to "state for the record" her home address, ostensibly to show that she indeed represents and speaks for the Laney-Walker neighborhood. But listen to her answer. It is very revealing. (See video below:click play button for excerpt):


Where is 28 Park Place Cir. Augusta, GA 30909?  It turns out that Pastor Scott isn't neighbors with Ms Mathis or anyone else who actually resides in  the Laney-Walker district. When we pulled up the address she gave the commission on Google Maps, this is what we found (see map below). Coincidentally, Pastor Scott is actually neighbors with Mayor Deke Copenhaver, who lives just across Skinner's Mill Rd at 75 Conifer Cir. Well it's a small world after all.

More to come.


View Larger Map

Matt Aitken: Like a Deer Caught in the Headlights.

Matt Aitken (Dist 1 Comm.)

CityStink.net Commentary
Augusta, GA
By: The Outsider

Seriously, where did this guy come from? Matt Aitken has been District One Commissioner for two years now and it just gets worse and worse.  Too many brain cell killers in the early years? Is there a better excuse for just not knowing what is going on? I'd plead the brain cell killers.  In An Augusta Commission meeting yesterday, Aitken found himself so totally out of touch with the 2012 budget proposal that he did not even know that there were employee layoffs associated with it. When Chris Thomas from WRDW asked Mr Aitken about his yes vote on the budget, he was completely oblivious: Watch the video here: 


Had he read the proposal? My bet is,"No," yet he voted to pass it. Does he prepare for Commission meetings or just votes accordingly? Might as well not waste the government paper on printing out his agenda book. If I were to vote,"Accordingly," I would be smart enough to make my handlers look good. Wonder how," They," are feeling today? Reckon they got the right boy elected to do their dirty work?

Prior to the budget vote, Commissioners heard both sides of the of the Laney Walker District Overlay Zone argument. I watched Mr. Aitken as he rocked in his leather rocking chair and seemed disinterested.... By the way, I'll give him best dressed Commissioner and First Place for rocking.... I think he was still reeling from an earlier interview request from a reporter from CityStink.net who asked him if he minded answering a few questions.  He replied,"You must be from that City Stank." Perfect answer, cause his handling of his constituents really, "Stanks." 


As Commissioners continued to heatedly discuss the Laney Walker matter, Aitken was totally disengaged until Commissioner Mason asked him to speak on the subject. Mason said," We have yet to hear from their Commissioner." 


Aitken stammered around as he always does and then in his best deep intellectually sounding voice, he began to talk about,"Moving Forward and Growing the city."  If I have to hear the words,"Growing the City,"one more time, I will have to run against him for District One. Seems like that was all he knew to say in his campaign three years ago, and here it was again today. 


"Growing the city," means get out of the way and let certain Cabal-connected "developers" make some money here! In all seriousness, Matt Aitken, Commissioner for the Laney Walker District proceeded to vote to allow an Overlay Zone for the Laney Walker area without attending ONE public hearing, finding out what it was about, making sure that his constituents were well informed, and assuring that all documents for the application were in order. 

Matt Aitken: "No Comment!"

He knew that this Zoning change was causing unrest in his district yet he chose to ignore it. Cha-Ching for the developers! As it turned out, other Commissioners listened carefully to arguments from both sides and made the right decision to hold off on the Overlay until all residents understood the ramifications and the proper documents were filed in the proper manner. One has to wonder if Mr. Aitken receives text messages during Commission meetings from Mayor Deke that say,"Dont Cave or we'll rescind your pardon." One has to wonder what pressure this must put on this man so that he continues to make decisions for his constituents that are so unpopular...And if this weren't enough....


Just recently as noted in CityStink.net, Commissioner Aitken was responsible for putting an item on the Augusta Commission Agenda over a year ago that eventually made all of Harrisburg an Opportunity Zone.  All of this was done without a public hearing as required by law. If this was such a great thing for Harrisburg, why was it carefully hidden until it was done? Mr Aitken, this is where I draw the line. Are you that afraid or your puppeteers that you will not do what is  right and follow the correct procedures under the letter of the law? Poor Matt Aitken was on the road to personal recovery and now obviously has gotten side tracked by the Augusta Cabal.  What a shame this is for a man who was doing so well.


Related articles:

• Matt Aitken Will Have Poor Record to Defend
• Matt Aitken: Like a Deer Caught in the Headlights
• Dee Mathis Wins Battle Over Overlay Zone
• News of the 'Burg: What Does the Opportunity Zone Really mean for Harrisburg?
• Urban Redevelopment or Land Grab?
• Open Letter to Planning and Zoning Regarding The Overlay Zoning District

***Do you have a story idea, a tip, or would you like to write for City Stink? Then please contact us at:  CityStink@gmail.com***
Share this on Facebook by clicking the icon below

Dee Mathis Wins Battle Over Overlay Zone at The Marble Palace...For Now (Videos)

Dee Mathis Claims Victory at The Marble Palace

Augusta, GA

Dee Mathis and her allies reigned victorious after the Nov 15th Augusta commission meeting in halting approval of a proposed overlay zoning district for the Laney-Walker/Bethlehem neighborhood. You can read more about the background over this here: CityStink: Commission Set to Vote Today on Overlat Zone.

Bringing a flock of supporters, Dee Mathis was joined by veteran property rights advocate, Al Gray, in making oral presentations before the commissioners as to why they should deny approving the application for the overlay zone as submitted by the developer.

In the end a majority of commissioners, in a 4-6 vote, sided with Ms Mathis and Mr Gray and denied the application. A second motion was approved that would have the commission revisit the overlay proposal at the first scheduled commission meeting in January 2012. You can watch videos of the proceedings at the commission meeting below.

Al Gray's Presentation :

video courtesy of Kurt Huttar

Dee Mathis' Presentation:




video courtesy of Kurt Huttar

More Video from Later in the Meeting when the Vote was Taken:


video courtesy of Kurt Huttar

Related Articles:

• Commissioners set to vote on overlay zone today
• Urban Redevelopment or Land Grab?
• Open Letter to Planning and Zoning Regarding The Overlay Zoning District

***Do you have a story idea, a tip, or would you like to write for City Stink? Then please contact us at:  CityStink@gmail.com***
Share this on Facebook by clicking the icon below

An Open Letter to Planning and Zoning Concerning the Overlay Zoning Proposal for Laney-Walker

The vote for the proposed overlay zone will be Nov 7th!

By Mike Sheil

• Dear Planning & Development, 

  I was happy to see in the Chronicle today that residents of Laney-Walker got some much-needed answers about the overlay district that is to be imposed on their neighborhood. 

  
  

  
  

  
  

  Click Here--> Augusta Chronicle 11/01/11: Laney-Walker residents receive much-needed answers on zoning overlay proposals
  
  

  From the article, I have learned that all the overlay will do is to ban liquor stores and pawnshops in the section of "Foundry Place" that is currently zoned for business. 

  
  

  I believe this is a fair reading of the newspaper article. I take further that no changes will come to the current residential zoned area of the neighborhood. Again, that's what I get from this article. The story also says that current property owners will be exempt from the restrictions of the overlay district. I presume that they will be able to open liquor stores freely without hindrance from the city government. This is what I gather from the reading of the article, but is it a fair reading of the facts? 

  
  

  The zoning amendment that was passed in June which enables the city to impose the overlay districts says this, as I'm sure you know, "The full text of the proposed additional requirements for the proposed overlay district must be provided at the time of the application for designations."

  
  

  
  

  
  

  I have asked repeatedly for this full text. So have others. We have been provided with various vague information packets, one of which is even labeled as the application for zoning overlay, but none of them is a full text of the proposed regulations. Has the text changed? We have seen nothing about the "grandfather" exemption in any of the information packets so far provided to us by the city, but now that angle is being put out to newspaper reporters. 

  
  

  
  

  
  

  The text of the application that has been provided to us says that every lot in the proposed area will be open to residential, professional, institutional and business uses. Every single lot. This fits in with the plan for "heavy commercial development" of the area. Fits a lot better than simply "banning liquor stores." 

  
  

  
  

  
  

  "The full text" of the regulations seems to be as-yet-unwritten, or in a state of continuous evolution. This document should have been in its final form when the application was first presented to the city. This is what the plain meaning of the law requires. 

  
  

  We are in much need of an answer to this question–

  Where is "the full text of the proposed additional requirements for the proposed overlay district"? 

  We would like to see the overlay district regulations in the form they are to be voted upon this coming Monday. That is, the form that they will take in law, not watercolor sketches. Certainly, the Planning Commission cannot be voting on a blank check. What is the full text, where can it be obtained? 

  
  

  Thank you, 

  
  

  Michael Sheil
  *******************************************
  
  
  Afterthoughts:
  That was the letter. By the by, I knew that they would try to sway the people with watercolor sketches. No joke. You cannot believe the power of watercolor sketches to make people lose their minds. The new overlay will find itself in the law code of Augusta. What will it look like there? It's a simple question, but they have been avoiding it like madmen. And this new thing about grandfathering in the current property owners? That is ludicrous--it would include the brand new homes the developer just built there and did manage to sell. These are the homes for which they are placing restrictions on older residents. That's the whole point of it. What nonsense will reporters in Augusta not swallow happily?
  
  
  Related articles: Urban Redevelopment or Land Grab?
  
  ***Do you have a story idea, a tip, or would you like to write for City Stink? Then please contact us at: CityStink@gmail.com ***
  
  
  Share this on Facebook by clicking the icon below

Urban Redevelopment or Land Grab?

Oct. 6, 2011
Augusta, GA
By The Outsider

If not for the keen eyes of a couple of concerned citizens, the proposed overlay districts for the Laney-Walker/Bethlehem neighborhoods may have been scuttled through at last Monday's Augusta Planning Commission meeting with no discussion and without most of the affected property owners even knowing about them. It seems that Planning and Zoning failed to mail out the required notices to the affected 136 property owners.

The overlay districts could have major ramifications on existing property owners in the neighborhood by possibly imposing architectural and  design guidelines enforced by a review board. This is similar to what property owners in designated historic districts, like Olde Town and Summerville have to deal with. Many people would argue that this kind of added layer of bureaucracy may place an unnecessary burden on existing residents of Laney-Walker, because these rules would be retro-active (meaning existing property owners would not be grandfathered in).

These residents tend to be fall into lower income brackets and may not have the financial resources to be able to adhere to the types of design and architectural rules that may be arbitrarily be placed on them without their consent. What if a longtime property owner wants to install a vinyl fence or change their shutters, or paint their house? Well, if the overlay districts are imposed, they may have to go before an architectural and design review board for approval of even the most benign renovations or changes to their property (just ask people in Olde Town!).

Mike Sheil, a property owner in Olde Town, who has fought many of his own battles against the inconsistently and arbitrarily applied historic preservation guidelines in Olde Town,  along with long time Laney-Walker resident Dee Mathis (who is one of the 136 affected property owners for the overlay district), showed up at Monday's meeting looking for answers and  to ask why affected property owners were not properly notified about the meeting. Because of the action of these two concerned citizens, a hearing on the overlay districts has been rescheduled for November 7th, and the following letter has been mailed to the affected property owners notifying them.



The following document, Section 25 of Special District Classifications, explains the overlay districts:

It appears that 10% of property owners can impose the overlay district.  So some people are wondering if this much hyped urban redevelopment program (funded mostly from the $37.5 million hotel-motel tax that was imposed to help pass the TEE Center) is really a land grab that will ultimately force longtime residents out. Below is a map of the 13 proposed overlay districts for Laney-Walker:

*** City Stink would like to thank Mike Sheil and Dee Mathis for contributing to this article ***

***Do you have a story idea, a tip, or would you like to write for City Stink? Then please contact us at: CityStink@gmail.com ***
Share this on Facebook by clicking the icon below